Greece and Greek America in the U.S. College Classroom

The classroom, as a site where knowledge is produced and subjectivities are mediated, is a vital contact zone for scholars of modern Greek and young people. We must, therefore, continue reflecting on the various practices that constitute it.

The forces bringing students to our classes are diverse. The discourse of multiculturalism produces a new generation of hyphenated Greeks, a population of prospective civic leaders, opinion makers, and cultural gatekeepers. Often savvy in crossing cultural borders, biculturalism, cosmopolitanism, and curiosity about Greek worlds beyond immediate family and community, this youth turns to our courses to explore heritage and identity, among other interests.

Non-heritage students arrive to our classrooms too. The traditional value that U.S. education places on cultural diversity is currently enhanced by the imperative, it seems, for international experience, hence the importance of study abroad programs. What is more, in an unanticipated development, university restructuring and budget cuts may also contribute to our enrollments.

The ethnic composition of this student body is diverse, varying regionally. In addition to the traditional core of our “European American” student base, African Americans, Asian American, and Latino students increasingly take courses on Greek and Greek American topics, particularly in densely multiethnic States; the example of California comes to mind.

Class differences, often vast, punctuate this landscape.

Engaging these populations poses urgent questions. What material do we address in the classroom and study abroad programs, how, and to what end? What do we know about our students, and the issues they confront? How do we frame Greece and Greek-related issues to this diverse student body? How do we translate the Greek American past and present to heritage and non-heritage students? How do we present Greek America to students connected with historically stigmatized groups? How do we empower Greek American students while avoiding ethnic celebrationism? How do we engage with the assumptions they bring to the classroom?

In other words, what kinds of research and pedagogies are needed for our purposes?

These are gravely underexplored topics. U.S. modern Greek studies has invested enormously to distinguish itself in the fiercely competitive U.S. academy, but has paid little or no attention to classroom practices, particularly regarding the courses we teach in English. Cultivating the next research frontier–educational pedagogies–presents a formidable challenge, one which may require strategic thinking on how to most effectively deliver it, given that faculty has commonly produced the kinds of publications conventionally expected by research universities.

How to stir the talents of modern Greek studies scholars toward a reflection on teaching, a vocation that consumes many of us daily, a practice that is so immediate, yet for various reasons turned so distant as a research prospect?

How to best capture the imagination, generate political and cultural interventions, and overall make a difference in the lives of a new generation of Greek and “non-Greek” youth?

Promisingly, teaching-oriented research initiatives are currently at work within modern Greek studies, heightening the anticipation for published work. Publications, reflection, and commentary on our educational practices are long overdue.

I will be investing in this blog forum to contribute to the unfolding discussion.

Quotation(s): Antiracism (I)

Δύο παραπομπές, η μία αντλούμενη από το αστυνομικό μυθιστόρημα και η άλλη από την ιστοριογραφία, μας βοηθούν να συλλογιστούμε τα όρια μιας συγκεκριμένης αντιρατσιστικής στρατηγικής.

Παραπομπή πρώτη: Από το βιβλίο του Πέτρου Μάρκαρη, «Παλιά, πολύ παλιά» (Γαβριηλίδης, 2008).

(Διάλογος μεταξύ δύο αστυνομικών, ενός Τούρκου και ενός Έλληνα, οι οποίοι συνεργάζονται στην Κωνσταντινούπολη για την εξιχνίαση μιας σειράς δολοφονιών επί Ελληνικού και Τουρκικού εδάφους. Ανοίγει την αντιπαράθεση ο Τούρκος αστυνομικός, η οποία ακολουθείται από τον σχολιασμό του Έλληνα αφηγητή και συνομιλητή του):

«Αν βάλουμε τη φωτογραφία μιας Ρωμιάς, και μάλιστα από τον Πόντο, και πούμε ότι σκότωσε ως τώρα δυο ανθρώπους στην Ισταμπούλ, και ο ένας μάλιστα είναι Τούρκος, όλοι οι Ρωμιοί θα είναι από αύριο στόχος. ...».

Δεν περίμενα αυτό το επιχείρημα και άθελά μου μού ξεφεύγει μισή χοντράδα. «Πώς και σε νοιάζει τόσο πολύ να μην πάθουν κακό οι Ρωμιοί;»

Δε μου απαντάει αμέσως, αλλά τραβάει το περιπολικό στο πεζοδρόμιο και διπλοπαρκάρει. «I am a child of the turkish [sic] minority in Germany» μου εξηγεί. Κάθε φορά που ένας Τούρκος σκότωνε, έκλεβε ή έδερνε, έφταιγε όλη η μειονότητα, γιατί μας θεωρούσαν όλους τους ίδιους». ...

Προσπαθώ να το ρίξω στην πλάκα. «Τα παραλές κάπως, αλλά εντάξει. Ας τ’ αφήσουμε για την ώρα».

Tο είπα για να τον ηρεμήσω, αλλά αυτός ανάβει ακόμα πιο πολύ. «Γιατί ανήκεις κι εσύ στην πλειονότητα και δεν μπορείς να καταλάβεις τι θα πει να είσαι μειονότητα» μου λέει τσαντισμένος. «Δεν καταλαβαίνεις την ανασφάλεια, το φόβο που κουβαλάει μέσα της, το μίσος που μπορεί να ξεσπάσει με την παραμικρή αφορμή. Καμιά πλειονότητα δεν κατάλαβε ποτέ τις μειονότητες. Εγώ καταλαβαίνω τους Ρωμιούς καλύτερα από σένα» (216–217).

Στην παραπάνω στιχομυθία, ο Μάρκαρης στρέφει την προσοχή μας σε μια νευραλγική διάσταση της συζήτησης περί αντιρατσισμού: Είναι δυνατόν ένας πολίτης που κολυμπάει στα προνόμια και τις ανέσεις της πλειονότητας να καταλάβει κατάβαθα την ευάλωτη θέση του καθενός μειονοτικού, και επομένως να τον συμπονέσει και να τον συμπαρασταθεί; Με άλλα λόγια, μπορεί κανείς να ταυτιστεί συναισθηματικά με το μειονοτικό άλλο χωρίς να έχει βιώσει κατάσαρκα ο ίδιος την εμπειρία του τελευταίου, μια εμπειρία που κάνει κάποιον να αισθάνεται τιποτένιος, τόσο δα μικρός; Μια εμπειρία που, για να θυμηθούμε και το «America America» του Ελία Καζάν, και εξαγριώνει και αναγκάζει πολλές φορές να καταπίνεις τον θυμό με ένα χαμόγελο που όσο πιο πολύ πλαταίνει για να ευχαριστήσει τόσο αυξάνει την υποταγή, τον εξευτελισμό, και την αυτοπεριφρόνηση;

Παίζονται πολλά στο πως θα απαντήσει κανείς αυτήν την ερώτηση. Αν η απάντηση είναι καταφατική τότε θα μπορούσε ο αντιρατσιστικός λόγος να βασιζόταν σε μια πολιτική της συμπόνιας. Τέτοιου είδους παρεμβάσεις έχουν πραγματοποιηθεί στα πλαίσια του Ελληνοαμερικανικού αντιρατσισμού.

Η ιστορικός Helen Papanikolas για παράδειγμα, όπως έχω επισημάνει αλλού (http://www.tanea.gr/default.asp?pid=30&ct=19&artid=68434), ανασύρει μνήμες από την ρατσιστική περιφρόνηση την οποία βίωσε ως κόρη Ελλήνων μεταναστών στην Αμερική του 1920 προσκαλώντας τους βολεμένους πλέον Ελληνοαμερικανούς να αντλήσουν από αυτήν την εμπειρία της περιφρόνησης που στιγμάτισε τους γονείς και παππούδες τους ώστε να ταυτιστούν με την εμπειρία των μειονοτήτων και να αγωνιστούν εναντίον των οποιονδήποτε κοινωνικών και πολιτικών δυνάμεων που τους μειώνουν.

Φοβάμαι όμως ότι μια τέτοια στρατηγική είναι περορισμένου βεληνεκούς. Όπως επισημαίνουν ιστορικοί και ανθρωπολόγοι, βιώματα και μνήμες αποκλεισμού δεν οδηγούν απαραίτητα σε αλληλεγγύη μεταξύ αδύναμων ομάδων ή ατόμων. Η Ιωάννα Λαλιώτου το θέτει ξεκάθαρα, στην δεύτερη παραπομπή που μας αφορά εδώ, από το βιβλίο της «Διασχίζοντας τον Ατλαντικό: Η Ελληνική Μετανάστευση στις ΗΠΑ κατά το Πρώτο Μισό του Εικοστού Αιώνα» (Πόλις, 2006):

«[Η] πολιτισμική κληρονομιά της μεταναστευτικής εμπειρίας δεν μπορεί αφ’ εαυτής να λειτουργήσει ως εμβόλιο ενάντια στον σύγχρονο ρατσισμό και την ξενοφοβία. Η εμπειρία της μετανάστευσης, ..., συχνά οδήγησε τη μεταναστευτική κουλτούρα και τις νοηματοδοτήσεις του εαυτού να εσωτερικεύσουν τους ιεραρχικούς λόγους περί φυλετικής και πολιτισμικής ανισότητας και ανωτερότητας» (367).

Αν η λοιπόν η ιστορία των μεταναστών και των παιδιών τους μας διδάσκει κάτι, αυτό είναι ένας έντονος σκεπτικισμός όσον αφορά την αποτελεσματικότητα μιας αντιρατσιστικής στρατηγικής βασισμένης στην συμπόνια των βολεμένων προς τους ευάλωτους. Με άλλα λόγια το να υπενθυμίζει κανείς τους Έλληνες και Ελληνοαμερικανούς, «κοιτάξτε, μας εξευτέλισαν τότε στην Αμερική ή στην Γερμανία ας μην κάνουμε και εμείς τα ίδια στους νεοφερμένους ή τους μη λευκούς» αποτελεί μια πολιτική περιορισμένης εμβέλειας.

Είναι λοιπόν αναγκαίο να εξετάσουμε εναλλακτικές στρατηγικές. Αυτό το θέμα θα απασχολήσει το επόμενο σημείωμά μου, με ιδιαίτερη έμφαση στην Ελληνοαμερικανική περίπτωση.

Mixing Cultural Codes

Photo credits: Thomas Papacostas, April 2010 (Dublin, Columbus, Ohio)

Serendipity adds exciting layers to the practice of teaching. At the end of a class session this week on the early twentieth-century café aman scene in the United States–clubs attracting multiethnic audiences from the Balkans, Asia Minor and the Middle East–a student waited to share with me the snapshot featured above.

This is how the student, who is connected with both Greek and Lebanese cultures, described the event: “This was at a dance hosted by the Lebanese Student Organization and the Turkish Student Association of OSU. It was held at a Greek restaurant in Dublin, Ohio, called the Greek Corner (which I came to find is actually owned and operated by Albanians). Because it was a Greek restaurant, the food and décor of the establishment was Greek (hence the Greek writing), but the Turkish and Lebanese students each displayed decorations (i.e. flags) from their respective countries. The music was a mixture of Arabic and Turkish songs.”

Everybody danced.

These contemporary mixings! Ethnic signs are appropriated for their economic and cultural capital while bearing no necessary connection with the identities of those who reproduce them. Eclectic coexistence of national codes–a welcome sign in Greek, Turkish and Lebanese flags, the replica of a Greek statue and others simulations of Greek identity, Arabic and other dancing–explode cultural purity. Emergent multiethnic situations, historically suppressed by nationalism, appear in various combinations. Contact zones where multiethnic audiences actualize around shared tastes on music and dance take place in New York City, San Francisco, Melbourne, and elsewhere too.

The dissonance between the Greek identity of restaurants and the ethnic identities of those who operate them is now a common occurrence, as I can attest from the Columbus restaurant scene. As an entrenched cultural and economic phenomenon in the U.S., Greek restaurants are now claimed by an assortment of ethnic entrepreneurs whose identities and cuisines lack the cultural caché of the Greeks.

This raises a number of fascinating questions. How Greek identity is constructed in these settings? What is the role of material culture and cultural practices in simulating ethnicity? Where do objects of decoration and recipes come from? How are they refracted in their translation? Where does the food originate, how is it prepared, how is it served, and who serves it?

Acropolis Club (Portland, Oregon)

Photo credits: Ana Chow, February 2010
Readers are encouraged to submit a caption for this photograph

Acropolis Club (Portland, Oregon)

Photo credits: Ana Chow, February 2010
Readers are encouraged to submit a caption for this photograph

New Directions (once again) in Greek American Studies (III)

Transnational Networks, Virtual Communities, Material Effects

Addressing family, friends, and members of the local community, a Greek-born resident of Columbus, Ohio, recently posted an electronic newsletter featuring photographs of a family reunion in Crete, his visit with his son’s family residing in Mexico City, his family’s travels to California, Texas, and elsewhere, and his business trip to Singapore, a country to which he has been connected for a good part of his professional life. Collages and photomontage are also included in the newsletter, visually dramatizing the density of his extended family spanning at least three generations.

This kind of popular chronicling brings attention to two kinds of phenomena: a) the operation of worldwide kinship, ethnic, and professional networks, a practice that has historically defined the experience of ethnic Greeks outside Greece (the Pontian people for instance) but seems to proliferate in scale and intensity in the age of globalization; and b) the use of electronic technologies to produce a public archive centered on the transnational experiences of family and personal life.

Significantly, transnational networks further mobilize to produce archives about communities and localities. “The world–wide Kytherian community” (www.kythera-family.net/) is an example. A website about the island of Kythera, it produces a rich visual and audio archive of its landscape and inhabitants, local and transnational family histories, interviews, gravesites, cultural events, as well as environmental activism. Seeking to shape local life, this initiative is the result of transnational collaboration as its team of producers, managers, and consumers is distributed all over the globe.

This kind of transnational networks of cultural affiliation and heritage production are bound to proliferate. The ongoing exodus of young people from Greece for university studies abroad–the infamous brain drain; the pursuit of careers, and the making of families outside Greece; increasing rates of inter-marriage across nationalities; the nomadic scattering of Greek professionals under conditions of globalization; economically secure families splitting their time between their home country and Greece; the importance of ethnicity, roots, routes, and heritage globally; they all contribute to the creation of transnational Greek networks.

The question of how participants in this process cultivate their ties; how they negotiate biculturalism; the place of culture and ethnic institutions in the socialization of children; their relations with host cultures and peoples; the nature of connections with Greece; transnational activism shaping localities in Greece in relation to global discourses in their national inflections (U.S. environmentalism, individualism, and feminisms, for instance), and the nexus of competing interests surrounding this activism. This is a fertile terrain for a transnational research framework to address the political and social implications of these unfolding phenomena.

On the Question of "Race"

I was planning to take a couple of days off from writing during Spring Break, when a discussion in the Modern Greek Studies Association list-serve (see https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/ under the thread “2010 Census”) landed me firmly back to my chair. The exchange developed along two directions: a) The politics of racial and ethnic identity in the U.S. census; and b) the racialization of Greek Americans. Below is my contribution to the latter.

Writing about the early 1900s classification of southeastern European immigrants as "inbetween peoples," historian David Roediger insists on the messiness (his word) of the racial landscape at the time. Roediger emphasizes the need to take into account the vast complexity of the ways in which racial identities were experienced and spoken about, throwing the gauntlet to the academics: "Scholars are no friends of such messiness," he writes.

Similarly, one of the most sophisticated anthropologists currently writing about the construction of white racial identities, John Hartigan Jr., calls scholars of whiteness to move beyond neat models and convenient generalizations to probe instead the ways in which identities are racialized contextually; to pay attention to their fluidity, ambivalence, and situational politics without losing sight of larger social discourses; to examine how cultural factors and regions (even neighborhoods) shape the way we talk and experience race.


Finely tuned ethnography appears to be one of the best tools we have at our disposal to chart this complexity.

I cannot frankly see how we can have a meaningful discussion on the racialization of Greek Americans without taking into account the racialization of European immigrants and their descendants in the U.S.; without, that is, examining the history of the politics of ethnicity and race in American society. And we cannot advance this discussion without knowledge of the latest developments in whiteness studies.

Risking oversimplification, but for the sake of establishing an explicit framework, here is the premises guiding my engagement with the question of "race":



1) I side with the constructivists who view race as a social construction, to only add what is commonly accepted these days: although races are social constructions, they may carry real-and sometimes devastating-effects on individual lives and groups (think of Jim Crow, the Chinese exclusion act, affirmative action, etc). To further complicate things, many individuals experience their identities as real. 



2) We live in a racially hierarchical society where approximations to a racial and cultural national ideal carry a number of privileges (lack of discrimination, high potential to marry within the dominant group, inclusion into "true" national belonging, etc).



3) We need to make a firm distinction between dominant racial categories (the ethnoracial order) and the ways in which individuals negotiate their place in that order. In other words we can speak of racial location as a) a widely shared social fact/construction (identities for example are racially ascribed in the U.S., the offspring of a WASP and an African American is most likely to be classified as "black") and b) a subjective experience of identity. 

In the situation where individuals challenge official racial categories is useful to remember that personal identity can be profoundly political. How individuals view their identities vis-a-vis their assignment into dominant racial classifications varies, of course, requiring ethnographic research to untangle this question in all its complexity. Conversely, how and why the dominant society assigns an ethnoracial location to a specific group may vary along a number of variables, needing careful contextualization. There are too many examples in American history about the whitening of the immigrant working class to convince me that class does not necessarily determine racial status, though class may factor-in in ethnoracial assignments, including the prospect of being included in whiteness (see Fairchild).



4) White ethnics (including Greek Americans) have been elevated as the poster ethnics of multiculturalism by conservative commentators and academics (among others); their narrative of bootstrap mobility (what Sylvia R. Lazos calls "the white ethnic immigrant narrative"), in particular, is utilized for all sorts of explicit and implicit undermining of racial minorities, particularly African Americans (think of who is prefacing William Spanos's story of becoming a multimillionaire; think of constructions of "good immigrant families" vs. "pathological black families"). 



I have an interest in whiteness because it represents an ideology (re)producing racial hierarchies. As such I maintain that it must be relentlessly critiqued; hence I insist on the analytical utility of examining racialization. 


I am not interested on framing the question as "who is" or "who is not–white," a question that invariably leads to reductive positions, dangerous biologisms, etc. I prefer to examine how whiteness is constructed, who does the defining, why, and for what purpose (though the privileges associated with appearing white is an important issue). It is of outmost importance to me to examine how individuals or groups reproduce or challenge whiteness. And I am also vested in the question of what kind of cultural and political work do claims to a white status or disavowal from it accomplish.

In this context it is worth keeping in mind that whiteness is continuously morphing into something else; it is modified in response to political and social developments, even through a language that lacks explicit references to race (hence its particular power). 

Matthew Frye Jacobson identifies, for instance, cases where disavowals of a white identity among European ethnics in the U.S. ("I am not a white," "I am an ethnic") may be far from innocent. When ethnics who are perceived as white by the wider population disassociate themselves from their white racial location they implicitly deny the privileges associated with this racial classification. In this manner, they render all these structures that perpetuate the (hierarchical) racial order invisible with all the political implications that this position implies.

Color-blindness is a lauded ideal, but the difficult question is how to bring about racial justice in a society already structured around racial hierarchies.

New Directions (once again) in Greek American Studies (II)

Global Greek Worlds, Immigrant/Ethnic labor, and the Workplace

The experience of the immigrant working class represents a terrain clustered with strain. Literary, ethnographic, and autobiographical portrayals of wage laborers offer accounts of bodies abused, scarred by fatigue; minds numbed, paralyzed by excessive physical labor; senses neutralized, succumbed to survival demands; selves alienated, their labor undervalued; lives sunk in desperation, subjected to exploitation; but also sacrifices translated into mobility; and a constellation of feelings (pride, fulfillment, exhaustion) associated with one’s labor.

Though common among the working–and low middle-class–such experiences are rarely included in elite ethnic narratives, unless to assert the vitality of ideologies such as the American dream. There is a reason that the political and the social establishment skirts away from such narratives of toil. Resentment unleashes virulent critique, directing its wrath to the state and the dominant classes. Just listen to the voices of disgruntled gastarbeiter shaping visceral anger into a vocabulary of accusation and protest [see the documentary «Ελληνική Κοινότητα Χαϊδελβέργης» (1976), by Λευτέρης Ξανθόπουλος, http://www.shortfromthepast.gr/intro.asp?id=5&lang=].

The recent academic refocus to class represents a long due corrective to the excessive scholarly attention accorded to culture and identity, as they were played out in relation to gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and race. Critical examination of inequality, workplace injustices, and workers’ subjectivities inevitably engages with globalization, a process shown to often widen the gap between the wealthy and the working poor. While city governments, multinational corporations, professional nomads, cosmopolitan artists as well as star athletes may triumphantly welcome the opening of global markets, globalization may intensify the marginalization, exclusion, impoverishment, and violence directed against vulnerable populations, particularly the poor. If sex trafficking increases in density, sweat shops proliferate, labor is squeezed, people risk their lives to cross borders illegally, and impoverished immigrants become the world’s dishwashers, garbage collectors, janitors and nannies, it is partly because the poor are relentlessly assaulted by the abusive practices of global capital.

We know little about Greek America in relation to workplace, a site that subjects individuals to all kinds of discipline and rewards. We have invested limited attention to the issues that plague the working class today, and the ways in which labor intensification and corporate philosophies shape middle-class lives. Consequently we know little when it comes to the question of how ethnicity articulates with class. Addressing these issues in a worldwide framework presents itself as an obvious research agenda that requires conversation across multiple area and ethnic studies (modern Greek, Greek American, European Greek, Australian Greek, etc.). It is possible to imagine, for instance, a comparative study of Greek immigrant wage laborers in Germany, the United States, and Australia–among other national economies–and further juxtapose these experiences with those of the immigrants in Greece. This research could contribute to activist agendas set to improve working-class lives.

Of course, bitterness and physical exhaustion do not solely apply to the working poor. Aggressive corporate practices work in tandem with financial crises to continue producing an overworked class of professionals, whose measure of mobility is dwarfed by skyrocketing employer profits and the excesses of the market. In metropolises such as New York City, San Francisco, and elsewhere, it is now more difficult for the offspring of immigrants to afford a home than it were for their parents’ generation. The experience of middle-class professional can be also examined through a transnational trajectory, in specific sites: the multinational corporation, the University, and the independent enterprise, among others.

New Directions (once again) in Greek American Studies (I): Response to a Critique

A colleague privately raised several questions in response to my recent posting “New Directions (once again) in Greek American Studies (I).” He pointed out that Greek American studies (GAS) but also modern Greek studies (MGS) scholars have a significant intellectual presence in U.S. academic journals, literary magazines as well as in the media. He requested, furthermore, that I clarify whether U.S. modern Greek programs currently support GAS. An explanation, therefore, is in order.

Those who follow my published writings would know that I will be the first to agree about the key importance of our public intellectuals. I have repeatedly written about Dan Georgakas’s revisionist historiography, Yiorgos Kalogeras’s critique of Greek American canonical texts, Artemis Leontis’s case for cultural activism, and Helen Papanikolas’s vision of interracial solidarity, among others. In fact, my forthcoming article in the Journal of Modern Greek Studies specifically identifies the contributions of pioneer researchers in GAS; it recognizes the historical importance of the Journal of the Hellenic Diaspora in supporting young scholars, featuring critical diaspora scholarship, and disseminating academic knowledge to the lay public; it acknowledges the burgeoning interest in Greek America among both GAS and MGS scholars; and it demonstrates the immense relevance of GAS in an era when transnational and diaspora studies are becoming academic trends.

My article also underlines the support GAS is currently receiving by MGS programs and institutions. It is now a well-known fact that MGS programs in the U.S. regularly offer courses on Greek America, maintain oral history projects, support research, and host lectures on this subject. Thus for the sake of absolute clarity, the question I posed in my original post should be, “Why have modern Greek studies historically speaking neglected Greek America?” We will have to wait for the publication of this article to revisit this productive dialogue.

Immersed as I have been in this knowledge, I took all these developments for granted. I should stress therefore that the entry was written as an afterword, as a restless call for more critical scholarship, more daring research, more probing projects, more engagement with difficult and controversial issues, more rigorous presence in the public sphere. It must be read in this spirit, as an invitation to move beyond our gains and intensify our effort to cover the lost ground, compensate for missed opportunities, and chart new research frontiers.

New Directions (οnce again) in Greek American Studies (I)

I took the opportunity of my sabbatical last year to reflect on the tumultuous relationship between modern Greek studies and Greek American studies.

Why have modern Greek studies neglected Greek America? I asked.

Why have Greek Americanists insisted on autonomy from modern Greek studies?

And what are the implications of this separation?

I discussed these questions in an article entitled “Where does ‘Diaspora’ Belong? The View from Greek American Studies,” forthcoming in the spring issue of the Journal of Modern Greek Studies(www.press.jhu.edu/journals/journal_of_modern_greek_studies/guidelines.html). Still, a number of issues urgently confront scholars and intellectuals who care about the cultural direction of Greek America.

I remain troubled by the scholarly neglect of Greek America. I do not merely worry about the dearth of critical scholarship; I am also concerned about the slim presence of academics engaging the lay public beyond the classroom. In general, we have remained silent bystanders in debates over bootstrap mobility, interracial relations, and immigrant poverty. With a few notable exceptions, we have not entered the fray over ethnic identity in the era of multiculturalism. Didn’t we have anything to say about what and how do we teach Greek America and Greece? In our reticence we have conceded too much space to cultural producers flooding the public with hastily assembled research, historically irresponsible accounts, and narrowly ideological stories.

If there is a moment to intervene, it is now. Scholars have been increasingly taking up the study of Greek America, producing valuable work. This is the time to advance Greek American studies (GAS), and find ways to responsibly popularize this new knowledge.

At least two research routes present themselves for advancing GAS. For those who view scholarship as the mere production and accumulation of new knowledge the obvious direction is to identify neglected research areas, roll up our sleeves, and set out to rigorously produce high quality work. The dearth of the archive motivates and justifies such a plan, which in the past has been the staple of programmatic essays on the direction of GAS (see, www.pellapublishing.com/books/new-directions-studies.php). It is lamentable that decade-old calls for further research have elicited only the slimmest of responses–and occasionally the weakest of intellectual investments–a missed opportunity that explains the field’s tardy growth.

Research projects could bring into view historical as well as contemporary exchanges linking Greek worlds transnationally. One could readily identify numerous topics for this kind of charting: early 20th century capitalism, Greek laborers in industrial America, and the exportation of American material culture in rural Greece (a newly fledged archaeology of Greek America has already taken steps toward this direction; see, kourelis.blogspot.com/2009/02/new-griffon-10-archaeology-of-xenitia.html). The performance of Greek folk spectacles in the U.S., Greek American folk dance troupes touring Greece, and performances and the preservation of folk dancing in Greece; Greek film festivals in Los Angeles, Hollywood in Greek cinema, tourism, and My Life in Ruins; the translation, distribution, and consumption of Greek literature in the United States and of Greek American texts in Greece; Greek rural development, cultural encounters between Greek Americans and the locals in ancestral place of origins, and regional associations in the diaspora; the creation of “third spaces” by Greek Americans both in Greece and the United States; representations of Greece in the United States and of the United States in Greece, etc. It remains to be seen whether a critical mass of researchers will pursue such an orientation. Given the prospects of these projects one may only puzzle why modern Greek studies scholars have stayed away from a transnational framework for as long as they have.

An alternative research path also presents itself, one that approaches scholarship as a reflexive critical project. I refer here to a tradition in cultural studies where research equals engaged scholarship. This position considers culture as a field of power relations crisscrossed with hierarchies and exclusions in addition to creativities and achievements. Subsequently, it views scholarship as an empirically-based enterprise (building on ethnography, archival work, close reading of texts), which criticizes or celebrates specific cultural forms, while making sure to spell out the reasons for doing so. If poverty humiliates human lives, this kind of scholarship sees itself as a venue to expose its sources and critique its reproduction; if dominant narratives marginalize, scholarship creates venues for the voices of those excluded; if a text empowers a generation, engaged research seeks to understand why and how. Culture in this formulation is a contested terrain. One group’s source of pride may function as another group’s source of oppression. The bootstrap explanation of success may generate cultural pride among European ethnics, but may trigger resentment among racial minorities. The struggles for its truth cannot be disassociated from the distribution of material and symbolic resource. Our research, therefore, does not take place in a vacuum, but in the backdrop of politicized debates about ethnicity, race, immigration, and diaspora. Our writings carry social and political implications, as they participate, regardless of authorial intentions, in wider discourses on national belonging, race-based poverty, dual citizenship, or interracial relations. In other words, scholarship not only interprets the social world, it is also implicated in its making.

In advocating this cultural studies agenda I wish to outline three research projects as holding great promise: 1) Greek cultural worlds, ethnic/immigrant labor, and the workplace; 2) new kinds of transnational networks and communities; and 3) identity and post-identity politics, all of which present the prospect of engaged scholarship and of furthering cross-fertilization between Greek American and modern Greek studies.

I will elaborate on each research project in three consecutive postings this month.